My take is that enthusiasts represent a small population compared to the general public and only nerds like us will obsess over range tests and metrics. They understood this and decided that marketing the 300+ miles was more important.
My lyriq did 300 miles on a recent trip before I stop to recharge, so is pretty close to EPA(on really good conditions) R2 seems to be a very different case...
Our Model Y lease is 10k miles. As of today the mileage is 7,777 miles and in 2 weeks it will be one year. Not bad. We could use it for a long trip if we needed to. We'd also have to subscribe to FSD for a month. Wife doesn't want to spend $99/month on it, but for a long trip probably worth paying for.
Let her know the average cost of hiring a driver is $50K a year, and they would want off on holidays, and may occasionally swear. $1,200 a year is a bargain, and even more so, if you turn it off when you are not driving anywhere.
I’ve always hated that comparison. We would never hire a driver. But she can drive herself.
Keep seeing this mentioned but the reality is that *most* manufacturers were over promising and under delivering - it wasn't until Taycan came out that that started shifting, when it way under promised and over delivered on range. FYI when Model 3 came out, 2018/2019 it was marketed as like 300+ miles but was hitting in the 240s at highway speeds(OOS very own test showed 249 for 2019 Model 3), still very efficient realistically but no where near the 300 miles.
The Germans have always sandbagged their ICE vehicles with HP and 0-60 ratings, loved that.
I can say from experience that of our 2018 Model 3 RWD, 2019 Model 3 Performance, 2021 Model Y Performance and Cyberbeast, none of them got EPA range on average (but not as big a difference as R2 seems to be getting).
Indeed, and likely the actual range will be plenty but for some people like me where I travel to next city it could be difference in a stop or not, though also i feel like I haven't seen a great 45-60 test which could make the difference. My Model 3 performance was really bad like 220 or something with the performance wheels. Crazy that like 7 years ago a model 3 was far worse range than an r1t(2022).
This is.....not right. The EPA allows EV makers to choose whether the efficiency rating focuses on mixed use driving, or highway driving, and probably many other variables that muddy the waters. This isn't a Rivian problem so much as an EPA problem. Rivian shouldn't have said it's as efficient as the Model Y though, as that's simply not true. The EPA options are all valid if you know what you're looking at, but they don't divulge that. I agree with you that the EPA (not Rivian) needs to pick one and stick with it - preferably getting rid of their current testing methods and choosing a simple "city" and "highway" rating, which are separate and consistent across all tested vehicles. This would be so easy to do, and provide so much more information.
I agree. There should be ONE standard for the EPA, which everyone has to adhere to. There should be none of this "Let me pick this one or that one based on how much I can game the system."
Why on gods green earth should the EPA have anything to do with EV testing?
Why don't you expect either BMW or Volvo to improve their capabilities? From what I have ready, they intend to (at least Volvo from what I've seen). Of course there are no guarantees. I'm still sour about my Gen1 R1S...
Question- The time elapsed for this test shows as 3:51, does this mean actual speed was ~66 mph (not 70)?
